Ms Ridhi Siddhi Enterprises vs. The Commissioner Dsgst & Anr.
Original PDF →Facts
The petitioner, M/s Ridhi Siddhi Enterprises, filed a writ petition before the Delhi High Court challenging a Show Cause Notice (SCN) dated 03.09.2024 issued by Respondent No. 2, which initiated proceedings for cancellation of its Goods and Services Tax (GST) registration under Rule 21(A) of the Central Goods and Services Tax Rules, 2017. Prior to the SCN, the petitioner had applied for an amendment to its GST registration to update its principal place of business. On 04.09.2024, the respondents issued a notice requiring additional documents, with a reply due by 13.09.2024. However, on 12.09.2024, the respondents rejected the petitioner's amendment application without awaiting its response, thereby violating principles of natural justice.
Held
The Court allowed the writ petition, quashing the order dated 12.09.2024 by which the petitioner's application for amendment of its GST registration was rejected. The Court found that the rejection order was passed in violation of the principles of natural justice, as it came before the petitioner had an opportunity to respond to the notice dated 04.09.2024 requiring additional documents. The Court reasoned that this procedural defect alone was sufficient to set aside the impugned order. The petitioner was directed to furnish all required documentation pursuant to the notice of 04.09.2024. The Court further directed that the application seeking amendment and the impugned SCN dated 03.09.2024 be considered and examined parallelly and disposed of in accordance with law. All rights and contentions of the respective parties on merits were expressly kept open.
Key Issues
1. Whether the rejection of the petitioner's application for amendment of its GST registration on 12.09.2024, prior to the petitioner's opportunity to respond to the notice dated 04.09.2024, is sustainable in law, particularly in light of the principles of natural justice, and if not, whether it warrants being quashed and set aside? Petitioner's Contention: The petitioner argued that the rejection of its amendment application was premature and violated the principles of natural justice as it was passed before the petitioner could submit the required additional documents. The petitioner sought to quash this rejection order and allow it to file a fresh application to update its business address. Revenue's Contention: The judgment does not record any specific arguments made by the respondents (The Commissioner DSGST & Anr.).
Sections Cited
Rule 21(A)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
O R D E R
Allowed, subject to all just exceptions. CM APPL. 68076/2024 (Ex.) & CM APPL. 68077/2024 (Ex.)
The applications are disposed of.
This writ petition has been preferred seeking the following reliefs: W.P.(C) 16194/2024 & CM APPL. 68078/2024 (Interim Stay) “i) Issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ of direction to quash and set aside the impugned Show Cause Notice dated 03.09.2024 issued by respondent no 2 and allow to file a fresh application for amendment to update the current business place. ii) Issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ of direction to the respondent no. 2 to update the present business This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 30/11/2024 at 14:34:10 address of the petitioner in their data bank also. iii) Pass such further and other orders, as the Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the nature and circumstances of the case.”
The petitioner is principally aggrieved by the Show Cause Notice1 which purports to undertake proceedings for cancellation of the Goods and Services Tax2
However, the record reveals that prior to the issuance of that SCN, the writ petitioner had filed an application for appropriate amendments being made in its GST registration consequent to the principal place of business being changed. While considering the said application, the respondents had issued a notice dated 04 September 2024 requiring the writ petitioner to furnish additional documents. In terms of that notice, a reply was to be submitted by the writ petitioner by 13 September 2024. registration of the writ petitioner on the ground of violation of Rule 21(A) of Central Goods and Services Tax Rules 2017. 4. However, prior thereto and more particularly on 12 September 2024, the respondents proceeded to reject the application for amendment. We find ourselves unable to sustain that order since the same admittedly came to be passed even before the petitioner could respond. This has clearly led to a violation of the principles of natural justice. In our considered opinion, this factor alone merits the order dated 12 September 2024 being quashed and set aside.
In view of the aforesaid, we allow the instant writ petition by quashing the order dated 12 September 2024 subject to the petitioner furnishing all documentation as required pursuant to the notice of 04
1 SCN 2 GST This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 30/11/2024 at 14:34:10 September 2024. The application seeking amendment as well as the impugned SCN may be considered and examined parallelly and disposed of in accordance with law.
All rights and contentions of respective parties on merits are kept open.
YASHWANT VARMA, J.
DHARMESH SHARMA, J. NOVEMBER 22, 2024/DR
This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 30/11/2024 at 14:34:10
Reproduced from the public record of the Delhi High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.